Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Entwicklung und Humanitäre Hilfe
Outside view (EN)
The global aid system is under immense strain. Funding has plummeted while the scale and urgency of humanitarian needs continue to rise. In this stark imbalance, the challenge is clear: how do we do more with far less? This inevitably brings us to the question of efficiency, in terms of cutting costs, but also in rethinking how aid is delivered.
Outside view by Fati N’Zi-Hassane
True efficiency isn’t about spending less. It’s about delivering better. It must serve not only the expectations of donors and taxpayers, but most importantly, the needs of the communities we aim to support. In a time of decreasing resources, our approach must be guided by those at the heart of every crisis. How can we ensure they receive timely, effective aid when it matters most? Any push for efficiency must begin and end with them.
The current humanitarian aid system has drifted away from this principle, turning international actors into permanent service providers. We justify this presence by telling ourselves that we are there because there are still needs. And there are. But we also have to ask ourselves why, after decades of presence in a country, are we still providing humanitarian assistance? And whether or not there are other actors better placed to do so among local government, leadership structure, civil society and local NGOs.
It’s time for a deliberate shift where an international humanitarian response is limited to acute, time-bound crises, with a clear plan from day one to hand over to national or local actors. This demands a proactive transition strategy, one that identifies local leadership, builds or supports capacity, and aligns funding accordingly. Donors can help drive this. They can structure their funding with envelopes that progress every year to shift leadership and resources to local and national actors in line with an international phase-out plan.
Efficiency here means reducing dependency, avoiding duplication, and allowing communities to take control of their own recovery. When international players stay too long, they risk setting up a parallel system. And the consequences can be catastrophic: a badly done withdrawal of humanitarian aid (as when funding disappears overnight is abandonment) but if done well, with a clear handover to local leaders, it’s empowerment.
You cannot consider efficiency if you’re not building a system that is efficient for the communities it aims to serve. Communities consistently tell us they want more than just lifesaving aid. They want safety, dignity, and the ability to rebuild. As resources shrink, this will be increasingly challenging, but we cannot lose all the gains we’ve made so far at bridging short-term emergency relief and long-term development efforts. Handing over an international response to local actors must also consider pathways to long-term sustainability. Response modalities such as cash assistance, supporting people to earn a living, protecting of the civilians’ dignity and rights remain essential in this respect. We cannot take a back-to-basics approach that leads to people being stuck in aid dependency and aid agencies stuck in ongoing service provision. We need far more detailed planning for how humanitarians can have both a quick impact as well as plan to shift away from emergency response, with better placed local actors leading the recovery.
In the drive for efficiency, we need to guard against a centralization of power. A resilient humanitarian system must be diverse and pluralistic. Local women’s organizations, refugee-led initiatives, diaspora groups, local and international NGOs, Red Cross societies, and UN agencies all bring unique strengths. Overlap between them ensures there is no single point of failure and promotes a diversity of views. Efficiency must include supporting a layered, interconnected web of responders, each doing what they do best. While this may actually be less efficient for donors who have to oversee a diversity of grants, it will be more efficient for the response. The complexity of multiple grants can be simplified through common reporting requirements, pooled funds led by NGO consortia and the UN, and shared services to manage the complexity.
There has been a lot of discussion of UN-run Country-Based Pooled Funds (CBPFs). These funds are important because they can disburse funds quickly, based on assessed needs, and offer simpler processes for donors. But CBPFs aren’t the only option. Pooled funds run by NGOs can sometimes be easier for smaller local organizations to access, with fewer administrative hurdles. These funds deserve more support. They should be standardized, expanded, and used more widely. One option may be a “scorecard” approach to assess pooled funds based on aspects like speed, cost efficiency, inclusivity, response standards, accountability and governance. Such transparency can drive improvement and allow donors to make informed choices.
The humanitarian reset must not be a trimming exercise. It must be a transformation, one that rebalances power, prioritizes community-defined outcomes, and restructures funding and planning systems. Our goal should not just be a leaner system, but one where each diverse entity (local and international NGOs, civil society, local government, UN and Red Cross), works in line with their respective strengths and weaknesses to meet immediate needs and establish a long-term, sustainable plan for those communities to not just survive, but to move beyond crises and thrive.
Fati N’Zi-Hassane has been Oxfam’s Africa Director since October 2022.
Previously at the African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD) which she joined in 2016 as Chief of Staff to the Executive Secretary, Dr. Ibrahim Assane Mayaki, she subsequently held the position of Head of the Skills and Employment Programme which she supervised the creation within the same institution, before being promoted to Head of the Human Development and Institutions Division. In this last role with AUDA-NEPAD, she oversaw the Health component to the Agency’s response to the COVID-19 crises, the creation of a Gender Programme, and numerous projects aligned to Nutrition, Education and Employment continental strategic priorities.
Before joining AUDA-NEPAD, Fati worked in Europe for more than ten years as a management consultant and program manager in large international groups, supporting the transformation of private and public entities.
Fati holds a bachelor’s degree in Statistics with a major in Demography from the National School of Statistics and Applied Economics of Abidjan, (2002) and an MBA from ESSEC Paris (2005).
She speaks French, English and Hausa.
Inspired by Tom Fletcher’s statement of commitment to the humanitarian community when he resumed his position as Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator (OCHA) in November 2024, this channel provides expert views and impulses that highlight the current importance of listening, efficiency, outspokenness, and innovation in humanitarian assistance.
